3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Casuist]

mosor wrote...

Come on now. It's easy to place safeguards and proper procedures on things we understand, because we made mistakes in the past and allowed us to prepare. When dealing with alien stuff, we don't have that experience, so it's almost impossible to plan for every eventuality. By your reasoning, Marie Currie and decades later the manhattan project scientists were incompetant because they didn't plan for radiation sickness.

Cerberus was aware of the effects and dangers of indoctrination from Reaper tech that was not actively part of a living reaper.

As for Grayson. Things were under control until the turians. He wasn't going anywhere and were planning on killing him before the reapers took full control.

Considering they had full control before the Turians showed up, evidently not.
Cerberus' track record with such subjects is suspect.
More safeguards should have been used.

[Casuist]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

It's better to compare it to NASA and the Russian space agencies than BP. Their research and development involved the cutting edge of human understanding and was very risky and dangerous.

Sometimes missions got botched.  Sometimes people died.  In hindsight, the crew of Apollo 1 probably shouldn't have been sealed into a 100% oxygen environment wearing flammable space suits.  But that doesn't make NASA evil or incompetent. 

As far as the indoctrination goes, I still maintain that the fact the Reaper has been 'dead' for 37 million years was more than enough room for the assumption that indoctrination wasn't going to be an issue.

When NASA's death count gets anywhere near Cerberus', I'll buy that.

[upsettingshorts]

Casuist wrote...
When NASA's death count gets anywhere near Cerberus', I'll buy that.

NASA isn't the only space agency I listed, anyway, here's a list if you're curious.

[pf17456]

' I'll defeat the Reapers but I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to do it'



I take that statement to mean that Shepard has an opposing point of view regarding 'human dominance', a view that resulted in not handing over the Collector base to TIM whose stated purpose is human dominance.



' I won't let fear compromise who I am '



Shepard seems to believe that TIM's motives are based on fear. I suppose Shepard also believes that the aspirations for human dominance are also based on fear.

Conversely I guess Shepard believes that all sentient life is equally important and will not contribute to a cause that states otherwise regardless of the price.

Consistantly throughout the ME series Shepard has made similar choices; opposing Saren, saving the Rachini, saving the Council, opposing the Terra Firma party, fighting the Collectors etc. More than half of Shepard's team are alien and the Shepard I play happens to be in love with an alien hoping for little blue children. So how do you look more than half of your team in the eye and your lover and say ' well I want to dominate you and your kind because human lives are more valuable than yours '? WTF. Or worse yet ' Well TIM who by the way wants to dominate your kind says it's a good idea and he's my boss so I'll help him get what he wants' ,again WTF. Shepard in this case has no spine or no integrity and is a walking contradiction, certainly not worthy of leadership.

[upsettingshorts]

Oh goodie, a new argument to refute... but I'm tired. I'll let it go.

Someone else wanna take that?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:20 .

[Casuist]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Casuist wrote...
When NASA's death count gets anywhere near Cerberus', I'll buy that.

NASA isn't the only space agency I listed, anyway, here's a list if you're curious.

I repeat my statement.

[upsettingshorts]

Casuist wrote...
I repeat my statement.

So what's the incompetency cutoff number?  How do you arrive at it?  Are you saying Cerberus' number of casualties is the base criteria for incompetence?  But then that would mean another organization with one fewer casualty would bne considered competent... I mean, you're now quantifying incompetence by number of casaulties, time to show your work.

Less than X, competent.  More than X, incompetent.  Where are you drawing the line?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:23 .

[mosor]

Casuist wrote...

Cerberus was aware of the effects and dangers of indoctrination from Reaper tech that was not actively part of a living reaper.

That's a pretty big assumption on your part. You're also assuming a ME playthough that did side quests. It's reasonable to assume that if the reaper is dead, so is the indoctrination device. Regardless, even if they knew indoctrination would happen, a team had to be sent in to retrieve that IFF. In a 2KM ship you're unfamilar with, that could take weeks. Without knowing how indoctrination really works(You destroyed saren's lab after all and didn't download any data), sending multiple teams to take shifts means risking more people. Some might get indoctinated just enough to be reaper agents rather than turn themselves to husks.

Considering they had full control before the Turians showed up, evidently not.
Cerberus' track record with such subjects is suspect.
More safeguards should have been used.

Whats your point? Having full control means just that. Grayson would have been put to death if it wasn't for the turians and no one else would have been hurt.

Modifié par mosor, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:31 .

[Casuist]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Casuist wrote...
I repeat my statement.

So what's the incompetency cutoff number?  How do you arrive at it?  Are you saying Cerberus' number of casualties is the base criteria for incompetence?  But then that would mean another organization with one fewer casualty would bne considered competent... I mean, you're now quantifying it by amount of casaulties, time to show your work.

Less than X, competent.  More than X, incompetent.

It's a matter of evaluating on a case by case basis. I've stated the ways in which Cerberus was needlessly reckless. As to the cutoff - of the 8 unique cerberus projects/bases we know about, 7 involve near complete loss of personnel, 5 of those without outside involvement.  

teltin
overlord
lazarus
binthu
rachni
reaper
retribution
home base

[Casuist]

mosor wrote...

Casuist wrote...

Cerberus was aware of the effects and dangers of indoctrination from Reaper tech that was not actively part of a living reaper.

That's a pretty big assumption on your part. You're also assuming a ME playthough that did side quests.

UNC: Colony of the Dead happens whether or not the player investigates it. If they didn't know, asking Shepard might be a good idea.

It's reasonable to assume that if the reaper is dead, so is the indoctrination device.

Not given the altering effects of the dragon teeth.

Regardless, even if they knew indoctrination would happen, a team had to be sent in to retrieve that IFF. In a 2KM ship you're unfamilar with, that could take weeks. Without knowing how indoctrination really works(You destroyed saren's lab after all and didn't download any data), sending multiple teams to take shifts means risking more people. Some might get indoctinated just enough to be reaper agents rather than turn themselves to husks.

Then having some measures in place with the expendable team to mitigate the effects/become aware of what is going on would be a good idea.

Whats your point? Having full control means just that. Grayson would have been put to death if it wasn't for the turians and no one else would have been hurt.

Given Cerberus's record and Grayson's abilities, I have no faith whatsoever that he wouldn't have escaped anyway. He shouldn't have escaped even with the turians (i.e. he should have been killed when Cerberus became aware of the raid).

[mosor]

Shandepared wrote...

On the whole Renegade/Paragon thing...

As I've said in other threads what annoys me is that it is the player who is punished for their choices. If you kill a character as a renegade it makes sense that they don't appear in the next game, but this punishes the player. The player should never be punished for choices, only the character.

I'm not gonna quote the whole thing. However, I have to say your ideas would have been pretty cool if it was in game. Then again, with ME3, who knows. ME2 is just the middle chapter. As I said in a previous post, it's ludicrous to think you have vindication on your decisons based on the events of the middle chapter alone.

[Nightwriter]

Wouldn't this make people complain that choices don't matter? There are a lot of people screaming for more realism and choice consequences - as in, if people die, they die. That's it.

[upsettingshorts]

Nightwriter wrote...

Wouldn't this make people complain that choices don't matter? There are a lot of people screaming for more realism and choice consequences - as in, if people die, they die. That's it.

We're going around in circles.

But my point all along has been that more realism and choice consequences should mean at least some of the Paragon options blow up in Shepard's face.  Maybe I'll get my wish in Mass Effect 3, but I haven't yet in ME1-2.

Keep in mind I am saying this is a mostly Paragon player.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:43 .

[mosor]

Casuist wrote...

UNC: Colony of the Dead happens whether or not the player investigates it. If they didn't know, asking Shepard might be a good idea.

Prove that the events of the colony of dead mission happened as a result of indoctrination and not Cerberus experimentation of geth dragon's teeth?

Not given the altering effects of the dragon teeth.

Dragon's teeth causing indoctrination is a hypothesis, but there is no concrete evidence that it does. If they do, I feel sorry for the alliance teams who had to deal with the dragon's teeth left behind eden prime after the geth where driven off. However, like I said. We don't know for sure that it does.

Then having some measures in place with the expendable team to mitigate the effects/become aware of what is going on would be a good idea.

What makes you think the team sent, wasn't expendable?

Given Cerberus's record and Grayson's abilities, I have no faith whatsoever that he wouldn't have escaped anyway. He shouldn't have escaped even with the turians (i.e. he should have been killed when Cerberus became aware of the raid).

You're making assumptions and playing them off as fact. Grayson overcame the turians because they were unprepared. Grayson had plenty time to get more powerful by the time he reached Omega. Cerberus planned to kill him long before that.

Modifié par mosor, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:58 .

[Nightwriter]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Wouldn't
this make people complain that choices don't matter? There are a lot of
people screaming for more realism and choice consequences - as in, if
people die, they die. That's it.

We're going around in circles.

But
my point all along has been that more realism and choice consequences
should mean at least some of the Paragon options blow up in Shepard's
face.  Maybe I'll get my wish in Mass Effect 3, but I haven't yet in
ME1-2.

Keep in mind I am saying this is a mostly Paragon player.  

Sorry, I just stepped into the circle so I don't know where it's been.

I'm all for more severe paragon choice consequences. I remember in DA:O, you give money to that elf in the alienage and the next time you're there, there are two elves. Next time, half a dozen. These things have consequences.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:53 .

[mosor]

Nightwriter wrote...

Wouldn't this make people complain that choices don't matter? There are a lot of people screaming for more realism and choice consequences - as in, if people die, they die. That's it.

They don't matter as is. The way it appears to be set up though, is that there are no consequences for being completely paragon. Could be wrong though, but that's how it appears. Personally the only thing renegades lose out now are on just seeing old faces again.

Modifié par mosor, 15 septembre 2010 - 02:57 .

[Casuist]

mosor wrote...

So your contention is that Cerberus managed to investigate Shepard extensively, study mind-and-body-altering reaper equipment, realize the existence and threat of the reapers, and managed to neither read Shepherd's reports from ME:1 or simply ask him before investigating the derelict ship.

Ignorance brought about by not following up obvious lines of investigation is still incompetence.

I'm assuming nothing about Retribution. The reapers are in full control and Cerberus removed any means of Grayson fighting that control before the turian raid, and there was no excuse whatsoever for not being able to kill him the moment the turian threat was realized. These are the facts as clearly presented by the book.

Modifié par Casuist, 15 septembre 2010 - 03:02 .

[didymos1120]

Nightwriter wrote...

I'm all for more severe paragon choice consequences. I remember in DA:O, you give money to that elf in the alienage and the next time you're there, there are two elves. Next time, half a dozen. These things have consequences.

I kept forking it over purely because they pulled that stunt.  It amused me.  And I was basically rich and didn't need it anyway, but mostly because their transparent and terrible lies were funny. 

[Nightwriter]

mosor wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Wouldn't this make people complain that choices don't matter? There are a lot of people screaming for more realism and choice consequences - as in, if people die, they die. That's it.

They don't matter as is. The way it appears to be set up though, is that there are no consequences for being completely paragon. Could be wrong though, but that's how it appears. Personally the only thing renegades lose out now are on just seeing old faces again.

I wouldn't say they don't matter, but yeah, we could use more.

I agree that paragons are punished a lot less than renegades, but in my opinion complete paragons are hurt the most by missing out on the great intimidate options, some of which are so awesome it's unreal.

My favorite intimidate option is the one you use in the VIP club on the turian thugs who are planning to mug someone in an alley. It's the only time you get to see Shepard bust out with some serious martial arts. Not just one move, but a series of moves. Oh, how I love it.

[TuringPoint]

It's nifty that these decisions can have strong feelings on either side.

Paragons are not punished really, not in any in-character fashion. It would be interesting to see results from the collector base decision that are different from what we expect... but I imagine the consequences of giving that base to Cerberus will be by far the worse. Though perhaps it'll help humanity become more of a tyrannical power over the other races, which make it a little more grey.

There was a hint of some consequence for the Geth virus decision. Re-writing them, I believe the game says something about how while you will likely have more Geth to fight against the Reapers, long term cooperation with sapient species is unlikely. I would also find it interesting to see longterm bad consequences of curing the Krogan Genophage. Either of these outcomes, or many more, could be spoken of in some sort of epilogue at the end of ME3.

A part of me felt that killing Shiala was safest, not because she "changed sides too often," but because she had been under the effects of indoctrination, and there's no evidence that she should be un-indoctrinated. Ultimately I realized the game would understand the Renegade choice in the less enlightened manner, so I never go with that choice.

They have come a long way since the Baldur's Gate days, but the choices they offer can still frequently seem quite heavy handed.

Modifié par Alocormin, 15 septembre 2010 - 03:31 .

[upsettingshorts]

Alocormin wrote...
Bioware goes out of its way to make you feel guilty for making the evil choices.

Indeed, and that wouldn't be the case if - as a Paragon - you were consistently having to deal with the consequences of your irresponsible idealism.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 septembre 2010 - 03:31 .

[TuringPoint]

It would be odd for them, then, to make you feel good for blowing up the base, for example, and have that backfire in the last game. It would not fit their style so far.



It would also force me to metagame and re-play the ending for ME2.

[upsettingshorts]

Eh, if choices don't have consequences they're not really compelling.

Paragon is too clean, too easy. Being good should be harder.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 septembre 2010 - 03:38 .